Comments on: The secret behind Nikon vs Canon debate http://www.ndreview.com/nikon-vs-canon-digital-cameras/ Nikon Digital Review Wed, 19 Nov 2008 00:26:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1 By: Peter http://www.ndreview.com/nikon-vs-canon-digital-cameras/#comment-1185 Peter Sun, 13 Jan 2008 15:14:49 +0000 http://www.ndreview.com/nikon-vs-canon-digital-cameras/#comment-1185 I'm fortunate enough to own both systems Sigma SD-14 I love my Nikon D2x the most ergonomical camera ever and that's what Nikon does it makes cameras with you in mind. My Canon 1ds and 5d I only use when top quality matters or is a must. And the Sigma SD-14 is my back pack all around beater that never leaves my car. All 4 cameras are capable of awesome picture quality the rest is up to me. We get tangeled up too often in this or that or wahat not but at the end of the day it boils down to a person behind the prism finder. Good luck :-) I’m fortunate enough to own both systems Sigma SD-14
I love my Nikon D2x the most ergonomical camera ever and that’s what Nikon does it makes cameras with you in mind.
My Canon 1ds and 5d I only use when top quality matters or is a must.
And the Sigma SD-14 is my back pack all around beater that never leaves my car.
All 4 cameras are capable of awesome picture quality the rest is up to me.
We get tangeled up too often in this or that or wahat not but at the end of the day it boils down to a person behind the prism finder.
Good luck :-)

]]> By: Allan http://www.ndreview.com/nikon-vs-canon-digital-cameras/#comment-516 Allan Mon, 22 Oct 2007 04:05:49 +0000 http://www.ndreview.com/nikon-vs-canon-digital-cameras/#comment-516 Agree with you. Just share with you my 2 cents. Talking about DSLR, I see Canon is far better off than Nikon, in terms technology R&D and product delivery. Canon started earlier in focusing on digital, and it was until after a couple of years did Nikon realized that digital will soon replace film. It was too late for Nikon. Nikon tried to catch up, however he always lags behind Canon. Just compare Nikon's first generation full-frame D3 that is announced August 2007 (which is expected to hit market in November 2007), and Canon's not-the-latest full-frame model EOS-1DS Mark II which was announced early in September 2004. Nikon's D3 is touted with 36 x 23.9 mm CMOS sensor and 12 million pixels, whereas Canon's EOS-1DS Mark II has a 36 x 24 mm CMOS (full 35 mm frame) and 16.7 million pixels. Surely D3 is equipped with 14-bit AD module vs 12-bit AD on Canon's EOS-1DS Mark II, however D3 is announced total 3 years later than EOS-1DS Mark II, Nikon has nothing to be proud of in this aspect. Nikon's top model in 2007 still can not beat Canon's 2004 model with sensor size (Nikon D3 still is not really full-frame, you might notice) and pixel count, not to say well-known Nikon's problem of high-ISO noise. Nikon is lagging behind Canon in technology partly because Nikon is still mainly relying on third-party (Sony) image sensor, a fact that seriously affects Nikon's ability to timely deliver products with latest technology. Nikon has a bumpy way to go to catch up. We are talking about digital technology which is so fast-paced that 2 year's lagging almost means death. Surely Nikon is famous for ergonomics design of their SLRs / DSLRs, however for professional / serious photo shooters, image quality is of highest priority. Also Nikon is limited in terms choices of quality lenses, where Canon's users are spoiled with a whole line of lenses from entry level to professional ones. That probably is a reason why nowadays most professional photographers will go with Canon (just see the white-colored Canon super-zoom lenses used at any sports events). And for first-time DSLR users, a huge amount of if not most, are likely to consider Canon. Yet, in my opinion, Nikon DSLR lenses are fairly price-competitive and still delivering fair results. Again, both Nikon and Canon produce fabulous DSLRs and the choice between which is up to personal tastes and needs. Agree with you. Just share with you my 2 cents.

Talking about DSLR, I see Canon is far better off than Nikon, in terms technology R&D and product delivery. Canon started earlier in focusing on digital, and it was until after a couple of years did Nikon realized that digital will soon replace film. It was too late for Nikon. Nikon tried to catch up, however he always lags behind Canon.

Just compare Nikon’s first generation full-frame D3 that is announced August 2007 (which is expected to hit market in November 2007), and Canon’s not-the-latest full-frame model EOS-1DS Mark II which was announced early in September 2004.

Nikon’s D3 is touted with 36 x 23.9 mm CMOS sensor and 12 million pixels, whereas Canon’s EOS-1DS Mark II has a 36 x 24 mm CMOS (full 35 mm frame) and 16.7 million pixels. Surely D3 is equipped with 14-bit AD module vs 12-bit AD on Canon’s EOS-1DS Mark II, however D3 is announced total 3 years later than EOS-1DS Mark II, Nikon has nothing to be proud of in this aspect. Nikon’s top model in 2007 still can not beat Canon’s 2004 model with sensor size (Nikon D3 still is not really full-frame, you might notice) and pixel count, not to say well-known Nikon’s problem of high-ISO noise.

Nikon is lagging behind Canon in technology partly because Nikon is still mainly relying on third-party (Sony) image sensor, a fact that seriously affects Nikon’s ability to timely deliver products with latest technology. Nikon has a bumpy way to go to catch up. We are talking about digital technology which is so fast-paced that 2 year’s lagging almost means death.

Surely Nikon is famous for ergonomics design of their SLRs / DSLRs, however for professional / serious photo shooters, image quality is of highest priority. Also Nikon is limited in terms choices of quality lenses, where Canon’s users are spoiled with a whole line of lenses from entry level to professional ones. That probably is a reason why nowadays most professional photographers will go with Canon (just see the white-colored Canon super-zoom lenses used at any sports events). And for first-time DSLR users, a huge amount of if not most, are likely to consider Canon. Yet, in my opinion, Nikon DSLR lenses are fairly price-competitive and still delivering fair results.

Again, both Nikon and Canon produce fabulous DSLRs and the choice between which is up to personal tastes and needs.

]]> By: Yamel http://www.ndreview.com/nikon-vs-canon-digital-cameras/#comment-17 Yamel Sun, 31 Dec 2006 22:42:03 +0000 http://www.ndreview.com/nikon-vs-canon-digital-cameras/#comment-17 Interesting article! I use Canon myself, but have always loved Nikon. In short you can say that I agree with you. If you lean to either one or the other, go for it. I did find your side-by-side comparisons amusing. Nikon seems to be the least expensive. Admittedly, I have seen this myself on average :) Nice site! Interesting article! I use Canon myself, but have always loved Nikon. In short you can say that I agree with you. If you lean to either one or the other, go for it.

I did find your side-by-side comparisons amusing. Nikon seems to be the least expensive. Admittedly, I have seen this myself on average :)
Nice site!

]]>